Broken Beyond Repair....:(

[yavoon]

I definitely did not miss my mark n.c.. and for future reference, just because you say something, doesn't make it so.

[Zylka]

Originally posted by Dissident
and I get the impression that Zylka hates the fact that I like the game.

I get the impression that he wants everyone to hate civ3 as much as he does

Why in the hell are you addressing me, MIST@R SPIRIT WALKl3R?? I'm not trying to have others hate the game, I'm telling them that we have a right to complain to have all of the twisted aspects fixed, and I'm justifying why each and every one of these aspects should be changed.

take a look at my screen name. I am not like others. I can care less if I lose 1 of my tanks to a pikeman. I just build another. I think some of you wimps are crying when your tank loses to a pikeman. just build another freakin' tank That will be my motto from now on. I may put it in my signiture.

Yes, good. You are not like the others, U R UBER SPIRIT WALK3R GURU CIV3, who can overlook all of the flaws of this game and "just build another one". It applies so well to everything. And oh yes, you sure surmised my complaints well in the above. The fact that I lost a single tank to a pikeman is obviously the very embodyment of the whole argument simplified, you are so F*CKING BRILLIANT IT DEFIES IMAGINATION. Note sarcasm, champ.

You people... you oversimplify and mischaracterize our complaints in the most blatantly stupid ways possible. That's all you have for your argument, to ignore every valid complaint and address parody/fantasy complaints because I R LOVE GAME NO NEED 4 CHANGE U GUYS IS PUSSIES

Fine, have fun. It really is in vain to logically destroy your pathetic & unfounded responses time and again - because the only ones who listen are those smart enough to have already figured it out themselves.


This game is fun.
This game is challenging enough.
Nothing needs to be changed.
No one needs to complain.
You're a ***** if you complain.
Yet will I download the patch that the b*tchers are pushing?

You obviously win.

[n.c.]

Originally posted by Velociryx
there are RAMPANT posts by some of the "Civ3-Sucks" crowd that have been downright evil in their name-calling.

Absolutely. However, I challenge you to list one where the C3 attacker made the 1st inappropriate personal comment (not looking at threads in a vacuum).

Actually, it would not be fair to ask you to find something that doesn't exist.

[n.c.]

Originally posted by yavoon
just because you say something, doesn't make it so.

Apparently your saying that a comment "hurts" makes it so (in your mind). Being the person that was not at all hurt, I merely informed you of your error and suggested a way to avoid making more.

[Scary Penguin]

My Thoughts

1) Civ 3 is much more playable than SMAC/Civ 2. The computer can give me a much more challenging game at levels less than diety without it seeming unfair. I get much further into the game before I get the feeling that the game is basically over. Civ 3's AI, while still quite stupid, is far and away the best of the series. Corruption and the strength of ancient vs modern units are both good things, because they make the game more playable, even once someone takes a lead in tech or number of cities.

2) SMAC had the best interface of any of the games. Civ 3's interface is actually worse than Civ 2's and much worse than SMAC's. Everything from control-q for retire to the stupid radio buttons is a step backwards. Also, I miss the wonder movies from SMAC.

3) The diplomatic win is so goofy that I can't believe they left it in the game. I would have disabled it until the next patch, just to save embarassment.

With all that said, I think #1 actually wins out over 2 and 3, and suspect I won't go back to playing SMAC over Civ 3.

[DinoDoc]

nc, we miss you in the OT.

[Zurai001]

Originally posted by Leonidas
3) Contrary to what some people have been led to believe, the AI cheats at every level of the game. I have played a number of games on the first three levels (where the AI, supposedly, doesn't cheat), and have encountered it many, many times.

Actually, the only cheats I've noticed is a cheat I've seen in every single game with a map: The AI knows the map from the start of the game.

Just four examples:

A) Playing on Chieftan (yeah, I know), I was bombarding a city. I destroyed a road, yet, on the next turn, it was built again. Has anyone ever had a single worker build a road in just one turn? But worse than that - on the very next turn - the AI had built a railroad - again - with only the same worker. I destroy those buggers on each turn - but they are re-built on the very next turn.

Actually yes, I have built roads in one turn, and railroads and irrigation and mines too - all with one worker. It's called an industrious civ under democracy with replaceable parts.

B) On Regent level, I had a settler and archer trapped - they were the last units left of a Civ. After I had declared war on that civ, and after I left the diplomacy screen, that settler and archer jumped into the air and landed 10 tiles away. I kid you not. When faced with extinction, the AI can pull off some dramatic events. . . (

Or, I could use my imagination and believe that in 1600 AD, that settler and archer had invented a springboard and parachute, and then with superhuman skill miracluously escaped

C) On Regent level, the AI almost always seems to "know" when its cities will fall to another culture. How do I know? Just before it reverts, you will see that city dwindle to maybe a 2 or 1 pop city before you take it over. However, the human player is given no such warning. . .

Or maybe they just started building lots of workers from there, as part of the normal AI functions. I've personally grabbed size 12 cities from culture before.

D) The AI also always knows where you are the weakest, and what units you have in your cities.

This I acknowledge. The AI knows the map in its entirety, including resources.

4) The game is filled with bugs. While most of the core game is good and playable, it was still rushed out the door, and it shows:

* Broken scenario/map editors. Even the user made maps available for download tend to screw up the tech tree. Sloppy programming? But let's pretend they work.

* No multiplayer - but I'll use my imagination and pretend it exists

* Air superiority and coastal fortess don't work as advertised. I have yet to get the regular fortress to work the way it should, although the AI has no such handicap.

Actually, I have seen regular forts work. The thing is, ZOC is only a 50% chance of triggering, and it doesn't show the attack if it fails to damage the unit, so it seems a lot less.

[yavoon]

just because all the people seem to be for some change, almost as appeasement to the onslaughts of the whiners.

I might add that, I see no need to change any part of the combat system. it adds depth and balance to gameplay, at the cost of realism. this is strategy game, not simulation.

I find no need to change corruption. it forces the question is bigger better, and where you can build cities. obviously one of the gripes eternally on strategy games like this is, because of reality, bigger is almost always better.

I really am happy about the strategic aspects of the game, and am only in need of obvious bugs, like interceptors not intercepting.

its worth mentioning too, that n.c. is one of the cuter characters I've seen in a while. everytime he talks, he talks w/ the authority of god, the conviction of lucifer, but the finesse of a bowling ball.

[Bubba_B]

Funny thread,

Your right Vel military victory in Civ 2 was too easy. Could never resist it.

Although I do miss ramming my Battleship aground to destroy a Phalanx

[Velociryx]

n.c.

Well bro...without looking too long and hard, how about: "Listen you patronizing jerkweed....etc., and so forth" to a post that was neither inappropriate OR personal. (granted, that's a fairly tame example, but pretty easily found in something like three minutes of searching).

There are a good many more, especially shortly after that one (and that's just in one thread I browsed after reading your reply), which turned into a good old fashioned flame-fest for a bit.

Bubba... Thank you....I'm glad it gave you a chuckle.

-=Vel=-

[n.c.]

Originally posted by yavoon
everytime he talks, he talks w/ the authority of god, the conviction of lucifer

Let's see, guy A told guy B how he was feeling. Upon being corrected, guy A says that he knows better how guy B felt. Who was speaking like God?

Damn, that was almost too easy. Feel free to come back for more.

[Zylka]

Originally posted by yavoon
just because all the people seem to be for some change, almost as appeasement to the onslaughts of the whiners.

I might add that, I see no need to change any part of the combat system. it adds depth and balance to gameplay, at the cost of realism. this is strategy game, not simulation.

Realism is the acme of depth and just balance. NO ONE can argue with that.

I find no need to change corruption. it forces the question is bigger better, and where you can build cities. obviously one of the gripes eternally on strategy games like this is, because of reality, bigger is almost always better.

You find no need to change corruption?? It doesn't even work according to the way the designers intended it too, let alone realistically. Governments do not lessen corruption as they should, nor do courthouses. The current corruption model is only fit for despotism. When they fix corruption in the patch, what will you then say?

its worth mentioning too, that n.c. is one of the cuter characters I've seen in a while. everytime he talks, he talks w/ the authority of god, the conviction of lucifer, but the finesse of a bowling ball.

Funny, then you must consider tact to consist of lying and brazen misinterpretation. Considering we're in the same camp, N.C. is being rather gentle with the lot of you. I'm sorry I don't have the same sympathy for your "type"

[n.c.]

Vel- Well, I'd bet an examination of the context/prior threads would be illuminating. The worst I've seen is transferred frustration.

Originally posted by DinoDoc
nc, we miss you in the OT.

Damn, that was one of the nicest things said to me on these forums.

I walked away from the OT to let my forearm heal, but came to the Civ 3 threads after release. Since then I been dragged into this sort of debate. Maybe once I'm back to using both arms.

[Imran Siddiqui]

n.c.: What goes around comes around.

Perhaps you should re-read your 'Whining about the Whiners thread'

[yavoon]

u are worse than politicians, I get called lying for a post consisted entirely of me giving my opinion. no wonder you have to keep posting to defend yourself, you need some real defending.

if they release a patch, i will play that. I am in this for the strategy, and the empire building "feeling" not for a simulation of warfare, or of democracy. cuz to ask for nething else would be hypocritical as a real simulation would be no fun wutsoever. ur harping on points that are moot in civ3's world. like vel sed, its not civ2, and u hate that. somewhere along the line realism and "its not like civ2" became synonymous.